Constitutional Convention in AP US Government

From Shays' Rebellion to Philadelphia in May 1787

In 1786 and 1787, indebted farmers in western Massachusetts led by Daniel Shays shut down courts and threatened a federal arsenal. The national government under the Articles lacked a centralized armed force capable of putting down the uprising, and Massachusetts had to do it with a militia raised largely through private funding. To many political leaders, that showed the central government couldn't protect order.

Shays' Rebellion was one of several flaws. Under the Articles, there was no executive branch to carry out national laws, no national court system, no power to regulate commerce between states, and no exclusive national power to coin money. Congress also lacked the power to levy taxes directly. Delegates from 12 states (Rhode Island refused to send any) met in Philadelphia from May to September 1787, with George Washington presiding and James Madison doing much of the drafting.

This is the hinge of Unit 1: Foundations of American Democracy. Topic 1.4 (Challenges of the Articles of Confederation) explains why the delegates came. Topic 1.5 (Ratification of the U.S. Constitution) covers what they built and how they sold it. The bigger question running through both is how much power should move from the states to a national government.

The bargains delegates made over Congress, the president, and slavery

Almost every major structure in the Constitution traces to a deal that kept some group of states from walking out:

• Great (Connecticut) Compromise: Large states like Virginia wanted representation based on population. Small states like New Jersey wanted equal votes. The answer was a bicameral (two-house) Congress, with the House based on each state's population and the Senate giving each state two seats.
• Electoral College: Delegates rejected both a direct popular vote and selection by Congress. Each state gets electors equal to its senators plus representatives, and those electors choose the president.
• Three-Fifths Compromise: Southern states wanted enslaved people counted for representation. Northern states objected. Three-fifths of a state's enslaved population was counted for both House seats and direct taxation.
• Importation of enslaved people: Congress could not ban the importation of enslaved people until 1808.

Each one solved an immediate political problem so the document could move forward. None of them settled the underlying disagreement for good.

Article V and the arguments the Convention left open

Delegates knew they couldn't predict every future conflict, so they wrote an amendment process into Article V. An amendment is proposed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress or by a convention called at the request of two-thirds of state legislatures. It takes effect once three-fourths of the states ratify it.

Because so much was settled by compromise, some questions about national power, state power, and individual rights were never fully resolved. The course points to present-day examples: debates over federal surveillance after the 9/11 attacks, and disputes over how much role government should have in public education. Both are arguments about the same balance the delegates were negotiating in 1787.

Matching an Articles flaw to its Convention fix

States imposing trade barriers on each other and printing their own currencies explain why delegates gave the national government power to regulate interstate commerce and coin money. A multiple-choice question might ask why the Convention handed over one of those powers, and the answer goes back to that specific Articles weakness. Other questions describe a Convention dispute (big states versus small states, how to pick a president) and ask you to identify the compromise that resolved it.

On Question 1 (Concept Application), a scenario about a modern dispute, such as a fight over Senate representation or the Electoral College, can call for explaining the original compromise behind it. On Question 4 (Argument Essay), knowing why the Constitution created a stronger national government gives you reasoning to connect to foundational documents like the Constitution itself or Federalist 51. A strong answer names the compromise, states the conflict it settled, and explains the effect on the system.

Writing the Constitution versus winning ratification

The usual mix-up is putting the Bill of Rights inside the Convention. Delegates in Philadelphia did not add one. The promise of a Bill of Rights came during the ratification fight, as Federalists answered Anti-Federalist fears that the new government would trample individual liberties. The Federalist Papers also belong to ratification, written to persuade New York voters after the Convention ended.

The Great Compromise, the Electoral College, the Three-Fifths Compromise, the 1808 slave trade deal, and Article V all happened at the Convention in the summer of 1787. If an answer choice credits the Convention with adding the Bill of Rights, it has the timeline wrong.